Backpressure....I might need to change some things.
03-26-2008, 02:00 AM
#31
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Washington, Seattle
Posts: 551
RE: Backpressure....I might need to change some things.
You can't work the 'quote' button, but you're an expert in exhaust systems?
Don't worry, I'll fix it for you...
You have already resorted to personal insults... and it's only your first response... 
No, we're not talking car stereo...
But since you brought it up... please tell me how the physics are different...
Sound waves are VERY similar to pressure waves, dumbarse.
I need turbulence?
...
I suppose next you will promote the turbonator?
Worthless comment... should I respond?
Yep, I'm dumb... (I think you meant you're dumb though, as opposed to your dumb)
You believe that these companies are investing their money for each individuals application?
I guess if I call up MAC, they will design a set of headers specifically for my 408w?
Nah, most likely they will sell me the same part number that anyone running a 351w block in a Fox Mustang will get...
The truth...
These companies have invested tons of $$$ in developing a product that will satisfy a VERY BROAD range of applications.
I have decided not to respond to some your more ridiculous comments...
So...
You are suggesting that it is more efficient to breath through a restriction, as compared to breathing freely?
All those years of athletics really let me down... I always was told to stand up tall, stretch out thechest cavity/lungs, and breath deep.
(Guess I should have been curled up in the fetal position, breathingthrough a straw between football plays....)
Now you're telling us that it is more efficient to breath through a restriction?
Sorry, but I don't buy it....
If you wold like to argue this point, then put the stock 55mm MAFback your car and see howit performs.
(BTW-
The 'pucker' technique is used for the same reason as the breathing method of a mother giving birth... and the reason ain't efficiency..........)
To say that a restriction will allow for an increase in Volumetric Efficiency is RETARDED.
Resonant Tuning can allow for a gain in VE, but a restriction won't...
Why is that concept so difficult to grasp????
Question my experience all you like... it doesn't make your arguments any more sound.
(btw, I have 'experimented with several' setups myself... been dorking with these cars since '96).
I have tried, but this concept seems to be falling on deaf ears...
So with this post, I have to say fairwell to this thread...
Especially after 'ImPulSe' tried to post his gay **** here... (I nominate you forbanning btw)
good luck guys,
jason
Don't worry, I'll fix it for you...
ORIGINAL: cleanfitty
You say tamato, I say tomato
You say dudeboy, I say ladyboy
ORIGINAL: dudeboy
If you call a cat a 'dog' then you are wrong, it is that simple............
ORIGINAL: cleanfitty
I said "some backpressure" in other words "some restriction"
I don't give a rats **** if you call it 'pipe length tuning'
I said "some backpressure" in other words "some restriction"
I don't give a rats **** if you call it 'pipe length tuning'
You say dudeboy, I say ladyboy
ORIGINAL: cleanfitty
Were not talking about a car stereo... I used to get a resonant frequency of about 35Hz in my previous truck
ORIGINAL: dudeboy
Resonant tuning is what you are talking about, but you keep calling it back pressure.
Resonant tuning is what you are talking about, but you keep calling it back pressure.
But since you brought it up... please tell me how the physics are different...
Sound waves are VERY similar to pressure waves, dumbarse.
ORIGINAL: cleanfitty
We don't want a bottleneck, we need some good flow, but we need something that creates turbulence
ORIGINAL: dudeboy
If backpressure were the only thing that mattered, then we would all be crimping our exhuast down from the factory size.
WTF?
That would increase backpressure right? And by your theory, increase performance?
If backpressure were the only thing that mattered, then we would all be crimping our exhuast down from the factory size.
WTF?
That would increase backpressure right? And by your theory, increase performance?
...
I suppose next you will promote the turbonator?
ORIGINAL: cleanfitty
Great!
ORIGINAL: dudeboy
Funny, I swapped out my exhaust pretty early on.... Only had 1.7 rockers and a OTS J3 chip (before I knew better guys, sorry...)
I noticed the difference...
ORIGINAL: cleanfitty
Upgrading exhaust on a stock motor yeilds some very small results and most people upgrade their exhaust for primairly fora louder more aggressiveexhaust note(and looks).
Upgrading exhaust on a stock motor yeilds some very small results and most people upgrade their exhaust for primairly fora louder more aggressiveexhaust note(and looks).
I noticed the difference...
ORIGINAL: cleanfitty
Your dumb! They are in the exhaust business and I'm sure there has to be some testing/ researchdone for their reputation.
ORIGINAL: dudeboy
This is becaue 'every exhaust manufacturer' does not do extensive testing for resonance tuning... duh...
ORIGINAL: cleanfitty
This is why every exhaust manufacturer suggests that going too big will actually hurt performance.
This is why every exhaust manufacturer suggests that going too big will actually hurt performance.
(I think you meant you're dumb though, as opposed to your dumb)You believe that these companies are investing their money for each individuals application?
I guess if I call up MAC, they will design a set of headers specifically for my 408w?
Nah, most likely they will sell me the same part number that anyone running a 351w block in a Fox Mustang will get...
The truth...
These companies have invested tons of $$$ in developing a product that will satisfy a VERY BROAD range of applications.
I have decided not to respond to some your more ridiculous comments...
ORIGINAL: cleanfitty
This is the same reason people with advanced stages of emphazima that have a shortness of breath use the "pucker" technique. They pucker their lips as they exhale and this causes some turbulanceand draw more air out of their lungs that would not come out normally due to their lungs being screwed up. They're not'tuning' their air flow, their using physicsto their advantage.
ORIGINAL: dudeboy
My point is...
It ain't 'backpressure'!!!!!!!!!!
Once you accept that there is something else at work, you can begin to understand it....
My point is...
It ain't 'backpressure'!!!!!!!!!!
Once you accept that there is something else at work, you can begin to understand it....
You are suggesting that it is more efficient to breath through a restriction, as compared to breathing freely?
All those years of athletics really let me down... I always was told to stand up tall, stretch out thechest cavity/lungs, and breath deep.
(Guess I should have been curled up in the fetal position, breathingthrough a straw between football plays....)
Now you're telling us that it is more efficient to breath through a restriction?
Sorry, but I don't buy it....
If you wold like to argue this point, then put the stock 55mm MAFback your car and see howit performs.
(BTW-
The 'pucker' technique is used for the same reason as the breathing method of a mother giving birth... and the reason ain't efficiency..........)
ORIGINAL: cleanfitty
no mufflers and no cats will hurt low end torque, (I would say 1000 - 2 to 3K rpms), but yes, once that obsticle is overcome, it will help top end.
I'm from the old school, where we call it backpressure... I don't know where you "new breed" folks get some of your information, (I assume the internet, and not real life), but I speak from experience. I have expiremented with several (and I mean several) exhaut setups on all my rides.
no mufflers and no cats will hurt low end torque, (I would say 1000 - 2 to 3K rpms), but yes, once that obsticle is overcome, it will help top end.
I'm from the old school, where we call it backpressure... I don't know where you "new breed" folks get some of your information, (I assume the internet, and not real life), but I speak from experience. I have expiremented with several (and I mean several) exhaut setups on all my rides.
Resonant Tuning can allow for a gain in VE, but a restriction won't...
Why is that concept so difficult to grasp????
Question my experience all you like... it doesn't make your arguments any more sound.
(btw, I have 'experimented with several' setups myself... been dorking with these cars since '96).
I have tried, but this concept seems to be falling on deaf ears...
So with this post, I have to say fairwell to this thread...
Especially after 'ImPulSe' tried to post his gay **** here... (I nominate you forbanning btw)
good luck guys,
jason
03-26-2008, 02:59 AM
#32
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: California
Posts: 10,468
RE: Backpressure....I might need to change some things.
Back pressure and resonant or pulse wave tuning are TOTALLY different. A shock wave traveling through a gas filled tube is NOT the same thing as backpressure or flow resistance(which creates backpressure). You DO NOT want backpressure. Period.
And people with Emphasema purse their lips during dyspneic episodes because the alveoli in their lungs have lost their elasticity, and in some cases they may even have atelectasis, so they can't effectly squeeze the air out. The pursed lips increase air velocity thereby decreasing pressure at the lips(Bernoulli's principle, same way a carburetor works), in an attempt to try and evactuate the air from their lungs. It's not because it increases flow, but because they're lungs can't properly deflate.
And people with Emphasema purse their lips during dyspneic episodes because the alveoli in their lungs have lost their elasticity, and in some cases they may even have atelectasis, so they can't effectly squeeze the air out. The pursed lips increase air velocity thereby decreasing pressure at the lips(Bernoulli's principle, same way a carburetor works), in an attempt to try and evactuate the air from their lungs. It's not because it increases flow, but because they're lungs can't properly deflate.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
folivier
Tennessee Regional Chapter
4
10-02-2015 05:32 AM
